click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
and our museum. if you choose to become a member tonight, we will give you a copy of the book. jon meacham leads tonight's discussion, a pulitzer rise-winning author and commentator on politics, history and religions based in america. he?g is editor at large at wnetg public media and contribute torg the pbs news magazine "need to know." since we're recording tonight's presentation on booktv, have to ask your questions from the microphone right here. we won't be able to accept questions from your seat. but now join me, please, in welcoming our guest. [applause] >> oh, i loved it. thank you. thank you all very much. thank you to the tenement museum which has in a relatively short time become such an importanty part of the fabric of the city. you hear a lot about it even in the american south where i come from, and they actually are struck that not everything is a tenement. [laughter] but, and so they can come and look and see what it used to be like. but thank you for your hospitality. and congratulations to louisa who has written, i think, a wonderful book, a deeply researched and engagin
this evening, will give you a complimentary copy of "conscience." tonight's conversation is a tie jon meacham, executive editor and vice president ran an vice president random house conifer editor of "newsweek" and pulitzer prize-winning author and commentator on politics history of religious faith in?gg america.?g?g?g7g?g he is editor at large at wnet?gg public media and contributor to the pbs television newsmagazine. after their conversation, love the opportunity to ask questions presents a recording to its presentation, you have to ask questions from the microphone hereççççç [applause] >> thank you love very much.x thank you to the tenement museum who has been a relativelyyy short-lived become an important part of the fabric of the city. you hear a lot even in the american south, where i come from. a deeply researched and engage in a written account of her own family, which is not always an easy thing to do. and they want to start with some specific questions and then we're going to read a couple of things. then they will be a little socialist jeopardy to keep her going. but w
you want to hit on. and then we'll open it up from more conversation. >> thanks, jon. first, i just want to thank martin and tom for the very gracious comment and i think quite helpful insights about the dodd-frank act. so i might just take 2 minutes or 3 minutes to highlight some issues and then we can open it up on -- or jon can lead us through conversation. on martin's comment, i think i agree with an aspect of martin's comments on resolution authority. if there is -- if there is an error in the dodd-frank act on the mix of crisis tools which undoubtedly it will be. it's in the direction martin indicated, in the direction of being overly constraining of treasury and the fed of the crisis. i don't think the error -- often in the public debate people suggest errors is the other direction. i think martin is correct. if we erred in limiting authorities, not in being -- not to insufficiently tough about them. on tom's comments, i do think there's always this debate in the regulatory structure. it's impossible to escape between rules and discretion. it's a debate that's been around for
? >> i don't know how to answer that, jon. i was laughing over at you. i was looking at amy friend who joined us and amy and i had lots of conversations that were about that very topic. and amy was right more than i was about the answers to that question. but they were usually pretty pessimistic answers. so what do you do? i mean, it's like any other constraint. i mean, we live in the world we live in. and not in a different world. and the political system is no different than that. and it's much better to design good policy that works for the world you live in than to design policy that works for a world you don't live in. so i think not just being pig headed is the answer i would give. >> well, there is a moment in history when it's a little hard to be optimistic about policy. everything is so polarized. my colleagues at brookings that congress is more polarized. that is to say the most liberal republican is more conservative than the most conservative democrat so working out agreements in that environment is pretty difficult. to take a slightly more positive turn, i think we do pass
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4